Holy Ground Homeless Outreach Gim

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
932486848
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2025
Location
Lake Charles, LA, USA
Phone
3378422433
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Services N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$47,609
Expenses
$28,156
Assets
$52,700
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Donna Mackey (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Donna Mackey (Executive Director)
  • Tonda Moreland (officer)
  • Faye Norton (Officer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

At Holy Ground we understand the challenges that the elderly, low income families, disabled individuals and the homeless in SWLA face every day. We are committed to cultivating hope and resilience by uplifting vulnerable populations toward self sufficency. 1. Rescued homeless individuals and provided them with temporary housing until permanent housing could be attained, assisted them in finding gainful employment 2. Assisted individuals with job readiness, helped them attain their GED while employed 3. rescued individuals from being victims of human trafficking, provided them with counseling, healthcare providers, full time employment, and helped domestic violence victims. 4. Provide daily breakfast, lunch, and showers and clothes for men, women, children and infants. 5. provide care packages with perishable items. 6. Assist with job placement by creating accounts with the Louisiana workforce commission to help find jobs. 7. Provide aid for utility and rental assistance. 8. Provide hai

What it reported doing in 2025

Caters to the needs of the homeless by offering temporary housing, education assistance, job readiness preparations, provide daily meals, clothing for entire family, facilities to shower.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 63% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 58
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.1%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 77.8%; rating input score 78; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 40.9%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.87; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 150% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 47.2% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 91.9% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.1% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $28K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 20 current checks pass · 4 findings to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesOther column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherEmployeeBenefits column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherSalariesAndWages column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.